Peter... Seems if you make a visit and explore the forums of NewBeetle.org, you'll find that the automatics are highly reliable.....but the one comment is to not take the lifetime fluid claim to heart....change it periodically as one would in any other vehicle. Ford and Chrysler are the manufacturers that have had notorious transmission issues in certain models over the years....not VW.....they have other issues people are upset with.
Us socalled lazy Americans need automatics to tow various items behind our vehicles. The automatics here are rated to tow much heavier loads than a manual transmission...if one were available. We also have people with disabilities who cannot drive manuals either. It's rude to be judgemental about people and their needs. You obviously have never owned a Honda or Toyota. While you can express opinions about their shift qualities, the transmissions in those cars easily last to 200,000 miles or more, just by servicing them regularly.
slushmobile.
As far as I know, VW recommends using 91 octane gasoline in the 1.8T.
When my daughter was shopping for a Jetta in early 2003, we rode in both a 2.0 and a 1.8T, both auto trans. There was no comparison. With the auto trans, the 2.0 was a dog. After that she wouldn't even consider the 2.0 so she bought a 1.8T with Tiptronic. I've driven the car and it is very lively. It shifts fine. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't like it.
My wife and I have a 2002 1.8T Passat with Tiptronic. It's a great driving car with plenty of power for me, even though it is a heavy car. I drive a 95 2.0 Golf with a manual transmission. I love it but it feels underpowered compared to the Passat in "round town' driving. At highway speeds, though, it has plenty of power.
Bill
78 Rabbit...10/77 - 4/02 82 Convertibles(s)...since 93 95 Golf GL...since 11/99 02 Passat 1.8T Tip GLS...since 4/02
I prefer a manual tranny to automatic, but your statement about transmission life is not really true. I have seen many cars go over 100,000 miles with no automatic transmission problems. If one is bad at driving a stick, or has bad habits, it is easier to toast a manual than an automatic these days. The replacement of clutches is a lot more complex in some high tech cars...and aren't they all pretty high tech these days?
As for why Americans love automatics, I think it has more to do with the type of driving we do, what we use our cars for, and a lack of concern over maximizing fuel efficiency. As for the latter, take the VW TDI for instance. It is beyond e why anyone would by a car like this, primarily noted for efficiency, and get an automatic which will get 5 mpg less on the highway.
The only car I have that is not a stick is my van...and I wish it was!!
Thanks for your opinion... I think my autobox should last another couple years, no sweat, until I sell the car.
I'm with you, they are not fun to drive, and there is more to break down... and like you, i'd have it all cars being stick shift if I could... But you can't pass up a great deal because of a tranny ;-).
But sometimes tho.... the auto is the better choice - so nice for commuting in stop and go traffic.
slushmobile.
problems...
**I had a 2003 Jetta GLS 2.0 automatic. Eight months later, I traded it in (yes, ouch) for a 2003 Jetta GLS 1.8T manual. If someone flies by you screaming "Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!" it's probably me :) I was chatting with the manager when I bought the 1.8T and he said that I could use regular gas. I was kinda skeptical but he insisted, he said that his family had two of them and they used regular. I've heard other stories of managers or salesmen saying the same thing. After discussing it with my bro-in-law, he made a *very* convincing case for using premium and thusly, I only use premium. **I don't know, but I think they might last longer. A little knowledge about owning a turbo goes a long way towards preserving it. The difference between the engines is that the 1.8T is freakin' FUN! Effortless acceleration, awesome for squeezing around traffic and I think the engine is just much more ready-to-go at all speeds. I test drove a 1.8T automatic and it was pretty cool but I think the manual is a bit more responsive. Maybe because you're more in control of the car. Could just be me :)
However, the 2.0 is a fine engine. It had more than enough power on the highways for passing. Its one weak spot was accelerating hard (like from an onramp) from 35 to 45 mph up to whatever speed. I would have the pedal to the floor and the car would just slowly accelerate. Kind of like it was out of breath. But if I was doing 70 and got stuck in the midst of a bunch of tractortrailers, I would squeeze the pedal and the car would rocket right up to 90 easily. Strange, huh?
**I learned how to drive standard on this car though I wasn't totally unfamiliar with it. I just had some problems stalling in 1st gear in that first week but I was fine with the other gears. I love driving manual, however, I can see how it would be a pain in the arse if I had to do a lot of city driving.Oh! The 1.8T gets better gas mileage than the 2.0. I couldn't believe it. In the middle of winter with winter gas, the 1.8T was getting
27mpg. Of course, I got used to driving standard and began to drive it faster and it sank to 25mpg. That's mostly city and rural driving, also.kaboomie
You didn't. It's just that you are narrow-minded and don't realize that the driver is also part of the equation.
Oh sure...
I was just comparing my manual 2.0L with a 1.8T slush...
All slush boxes suck except for the way the TDI slush box shifts. I think they did an okay job there with the TDI. I notice no slush drag when you let off the gas and let it coast. The TDI RPM goes to idle as it should.
Oh sure...
I was comparing my 5-speed 2.0L with me driving it and some average Nancy-Joe driving a 1.8T slush box. If the 1.8T was manual and had a good driver I would not be competition.
If I didn't keep my VWs with high mileage, I would go Turbo too. However NA engines are generally much more reliable than Turbo or Super-Charger.
Oh good.
Of course, but with an automatic you can't use your intelligence on a curved track or road. You have to use your brakes instead of gearing down.
Yep. I have a motorcycle license too and have a bike...
It was never war, just a difference in opinion and experience.
Is the mileage as phenomenal as I keep hearing? A buddy of mine's girlfriend is thinking of a Prius (she's very green) and he's trying to steer her towards a Jetta TDI. Emanuel
Jim B.
You didn't. It's just that you are narrow-minded and don't realize that the driver is also part of the equation.
Oh sure...
I was just comparing my manual 2.0L with a 1.8T slush...
All slush boxes suck except for the way the TDI slush box shifts. I think they did an okay job there with the TDI. I notice no slush drag when you let off the gas and let it coast. The TDI RPM goes to idle as it should.
Oh sure...
I was comparing my 5-speed 2.0L with me driving it and some average Nancy-Joe driving a 1.8T slush box. If the 1.8T was manual and had a good driver I would not be competition.
If I didn't keep my VWs with high mileage, I would go Turbo too. However NA engines are generally much more reliable than Turbo or Super-Charger.
Oh good.
Of course, but with an automatic you can't use your intelligence on a curved track or road. You have to use your brakes instead of gearing down.
Yep. I have a motorcycle license too and have a bike...
It was never war, just a difference in opinion and experience.
Hey Larry, while your are at it why don't you go and join the Army and help fight over in Iraq. With your additude, we should have that place conformed in no time. You obviously didn't read my first post where I mentioned that the Toyota automatic is the best slush box around with its trademarked electronic controlled transmission. This ECT is also being sold to other OEMs for use.
This is UseNet, so get used to hearing things that are too hard for your mind and emotional feeling to hear. Do you know if VW has a disabilities program? If not then you are talking out of your A$$. Ford for example has a program for disabled people. Buy a Ford if you are disabled or any other OEM that has a program. I also have experienced Toyota and Honda. I haven't mentioned anything bad about them.
We are talking about VW automatics, just so you are aware of the thread.
Still. I have traveled the world and find that automatics are not in Europe and many parts of Asia. They are not in third world countries like South America and China. Why? Because, they are too expensive to keep up and hard to repair in those countries once they go bad.
Why are you bringing up towing now? Transmissions are rated for GVWR and GCWR. Engine type and chassis is what makes the tow rating. Why are you making up this idea that automatics can tow heavier loads? Have you ever seen specs for automatics GVWR and GCWR verse manual transmissions in big Trucks? This is why big Trucks (F-650, F-750) have different optional transmissions.
If you want to tow, do not buy a VW period. My favorite towing vehicle would be a Jeep Cherokee. Not too big. However the best towing consumer truck would be the Ford F-350 dually Diesel. You can also get them in manual. This is because in the Mid-West, people use manuals instead of automatics and they don't use 4WD. They use 2WD trucks. This is because of the mountain regions and the automatics do not last long there for towing.
Why not? I see it all the time. Automatics tend to fail much more before 100K than manual trannies do.
Sure it is. That's because the driver has to have the ability to use the manual and clutch correctly. If they do, the clutch will last easy over 150K miles and even over 200K miles with the older VW diesels (Rabbit, A1 Jetta, A2 Golf, Jetta) because of low HP, no need for spinning tires. :)
That is too bad. I didn't know this. The enclosed VW manual tranny is an excellent design, light weight and reliable especially if it has the bolt kit. I think VW is trying to do the same for the automatics by eliminating the dipstick and making it sealed like the manual but it still will wear out faster than the manual. It's comes down to who is driving.
This was the thought way back when, IMHO. When domestic OEMs went from manual to automatics. This was the norm. Fuel was cheap and automatics where born. However automatics are just not feasible in certain work and maintenance conditions. So they have not taken over the world. IMO, eventually the old automatic will be replaced with the CVT (continuous variable transmission) for passenger vehicles. The traditional automatics and manuals will still be used for heavier duty aps. However I don't know the reliability on CVTs yet. I have driven a CVT vehicle and I like the way the power curve is for the engine. Instead of a saw-tooth zig-zag, you have a smooth curve like a HP curve chart.
I don't know if you remember when the TDI came over into the US. The first ones were manual only because VW had to re-upfit the automatic to be able to handle the high torque for the TDI. This is so they could introduce the TDI for the US and NA market. IOW, so regular "Lazy Americans" would want to buy it instead of learning how to drive stick. :)
Yep. I'm not very familiar with the Eurovan. I guess you can get that in manual if I had a need for one.
They sometimes need to get re-flashed from what I heard. Sometimes they lose their smoothness and start shifting harsh. One thing to remember is not to beat on them too often. What I mean is forcing them to go into passing gear all the time. A consistant peddle control is much better than a jerky one.
They are more convenient. Manuals are also usually "one driver" vehicles. What I mean by that is, they last longer with one driver's way of driving verses an automatic that can bear multible ways. This is especially true if you have a high mileage manual unit, and the son wants to start driving it. It would not last long after this. :-)
That is the number one reason why automatics are here to stay. The stop and go traffic in commuting here in NA. Third world countries have congestion but instead of stop and go, they just slow down to a crawl. Poor traffic control and mix of cars, buses, motorcycles and bicycles on the same road.(China)
VW has issues. I also hope they do something about their hardware reliability. I think they should stay simple and not complex. Complex is not the future IMO.
I am not totally against automatics. They have their place in society. The TDI automatic was re-designed just for the NA market so it would be able to handle the TDI torque. This just tells you something about VWs priorities.
Even the heavy duty truck automatics like the Allison 2000, 2500s. They are heavy duty but are still considered trouble makers and have had issues.
Yes, Ford has problems with their F-series transmissions. They do not last long without fluid changes too. The new 6.0L Diesel by International also has it's issues and they redesigned the transmission for the 6.0L to a
5 speed. I think that is a mistake but if used properly it might last. New 2003. Ford trucks are for towing but Ford has to make them better because the competition is getting fierce. The others, GM, Dodge, etc, are still behind when it comes to hauling trailers. However, the Chevy truck drives like a car. The new F-150 is too much like a car now IMO. I don't know if it will meet the work truck requirements but my first impression is that they still have to keep figuring out the next level because Nissan is really taking the market. Nissan is supposed to be the hottest OEM right now.
In the old days you could get a 5 speed, but since 97 or so, when they re-emerged in the US after being a way for a while, it was automatic only.
Tony
Oh too bad. Thanks for the info. I saw a Eurovan the other day in a Wahlmart partking lot. I really liked how it was set up for camping. I would like to see a diesel manual Eurovan with outback type trimmings. :)
BTW, I have noticed that there is a cult following for the old Ford AeroStar minivan, especially the AWD version. Ford really made this 4cyl minivan so well, people that own them will never let them go. They are hard to find used and the new stuff since then (Windstar, Freestar) do not have AWD.
It is amazing that sometimes out of pure accident, an OEM makes a vehicle that is practical, have good MPG, and is still economical to own. I hope that VW will find it's way back to those days.
Actually I would really like to see the automotive landscape change again to conform to the expense of operating costs, inflation et al. I would like to see the smaller vehicles come over here from Europe and also NA needs to change their way of shipping goods by making the Truck efficient and smaller.
Unfortunately no diesels made it to the US but the 2.4D made it to Canada. It's pretty slow though. None of the TDI versions made it to Canada but Europe got some 5-cylinder TDIs.
They're 4-cyl and 6-cyl...pretty sure all of the AWDs are 6-cylinder. Unfortinately they have their issues. My dad had a '93 up until about six months ago. It had all sorts of electrical issues. Went through shocks a lot too. Right after he sold it to the new owner, the head gasket blew. A Eurovan is far better built. When the Aerostar was running right though it wasn't a bad van, esp. for a rear driver.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.